scholarly journals Secukinumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis and axial manifestations: results from the double-blind, randomised, phase 3 MAXIMISE trial

2020 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2020-218808
Author(s):  
Xenofon Baraliakos ◽  
Laure Gossec ◽  
Effie Pournara ◽  
Slawomir Jeka ◽  
Antonio Mera-Varela ◽  
...  

ObjectivesMAXIMISE (Managing AXIal Manifestations in psorIatic arthritis with SEcukinumab) trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of secukinumab in the management of axial manifestations of psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsThis phase 3b, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre 52-week trial included patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with PsA and classified by ClASsification criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) criteria, with spinal pain Visual Analogue Score ≥40/100 and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score ≥4 despite use of at least two non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients were randomised (1:1:1) to secukinumab 300 mg, secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly for 4 weeks and every 4 weeks thereafter. At week 12, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 300/150 mg. Primary endpoint was ASAS20 (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society) response with secukinumab 300 mg at week 12.ResultsPatients were randomly assigned; 167 to secukinumab 300 mg, 165 to secukinumab 150 mg and 166 to placebo. Secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg significantly improved ASAS20 response versus placebo at week 12 (63% and 66% vs 31% placebo). The OR (95% CI) comparing secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg versus placebo, using a logistic regression model after multiple imputation, was 3.8 (2.4 and 6.1) and 4.4 (2.7 and 7.0; p<0.0001).ConclusionsSecukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg provided significant improvement in signs and symptoms of axial disease compared with placebo in patients with PsA and axial manifestations with inadequate response to NSAIDs.Trial registration numberNCT02721966.

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 35-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
X. Baraliakos ◽  
L. Gossec ◽  
E. Pournara ◽  
S. Jeka ◽  
R. Blanco ◽  
...  

Background:Although axial disease may affect up to 70% of patients (pts) with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA), evidence on the efficacy of biologics in the treatment of axial manifestations in such pts is limited,1particularly as validated classification criteria for this subtype of PsA are not yet available. MAXIMISE (NCT02721966) is the first randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a biologic in the management of the axial manifestations of PsA and showed that secukinumab (SEC) 300 and 150 mg provided rapid and significant improvement in ASAS20 responses in these pts through week (Wk) 12.2Objectives:To present 52 wks efficacy results and imaging data from the MAXIMISE trial.Methods:This phase 3b, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, multicentre 52-wk trial included 498 pts (aged ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of PsA and classified by CASPAR criteria, spinal pain VAS score ≥ 40/100 and BASDAI score ≥ 4 despite use of at least two NSAIDs. Pts were randomised to SEC 300 mg (N=167) or SEC 150 mg (N=165) or PBO (N=166) wkly for 4 wks and every 4 wks thereafter. At Wk 12, PBO pts were re-randomised to SEC 300/150 mg. The primary endpoint was ASAS20 response with SEC 300 mg at Wk 12. The key secondary endpoint was ASAS20 response with SEC 150 mg at Wk 12. Wk 52 data are presented as observed. Bone marrow oedema of the entire spine and sacroiliac joints were assessed centrally with Berlin MRI scores at Baseline, Wk 12 and Wk 52.Results:Primary and key secondary endpoints were met; ASAS20 responses were sustained and increased further through Wk 52. 75%/79.7% of the PBO pts re-randomised at Wk 12 to SEC 300/150 mg achieved ASAS20 response at Wk 52 (Figure 1). ASAS40 responses at Wk 52 were 69.1% [SEC 300 mg], 64.5% [SEC 150 mg], 62.5% [PBO-SEC 300 mg], and 54.1% [PBO-SEC 150 mg]. At baseline, 59.5% [SEC 300 mg], 53.5% [SEC 150 mg] and 64.2% [PBO] of the pts had positive MRIs for the sacroiliac joints and/or the spine with Berlin MRI score ≥1. The reductions of Berlin MRI score for entire spine and sacroiliac joints were statistically significant for pts treated with SEC 300/150 mg vs. placebo (Figure 2a and b). There were no new or unexpected safety findings.Figure 1.ASAS20 Response over 52 Wks*Figure 2.Total Berlin MRI score for the Entire Spine and Sacroiliac Joints at Wk 12Conclusion:Secukinumab improved all evaluated ASAS responses through Wk 52 in PsA pts with axial manifestations and inadequate responses to NSAIDs and led to significant reduction of inflammatory MRI lesions in the spine and the Sacroiliac Joints. The safety profile of secukinumab through Wk 52 was consistent with previous reports.3-4References:[1]McInnes IB, et al.Lancet.2015;386(9999):1137–46.[2]Baraliakos X, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71 (suppl 10).[3]Langley RG, et al.N Engl J Med.2014;371:326–38.[4]Sieper J, et al.Ann Rheum Dis.2016;0:1–8.Acknowledgments:The study was sponsored by Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.Disclosure of Interests:Xenofon Baraliakos Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Effie Pournara Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Sławomir Jeka Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Egis, UCB, Celgene, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Egis, UCB, Celgene, Ricardo Blanco Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Roche, Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Bristol-Myers, Janssen, UCB Pharma and MSD, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Bristol-Myers, Janssen, UCB Pharma. MSD, Salvatore D’Angelo Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB, Barbara Schulz Employee of: Novartis, Michael Rissler Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Kriti Nagar Employee of: Novartis, Chiara Perella Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Laura C Coates: None declared


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1302-1302
Author(s):  
I. Gaydukova ◽  
T. Korotaeva ◽  
V. Mazurov ◽  
A. Samtsov ◽  
V. Khayrutdinov ◽  
...  

Background:Netakimab (NTK) is an anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody approved for psoriasis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Russia and Belarus. PATERA is an ongoing phase 3 international double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study of NTK in PsA (NCT03598751).Objectives:A subanalysis was performed to assess the effect of NTK on domains of the 5-level EuroQol 5 Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) in patients with inflammatory back pain (IBP) (IBP(+)) and without (IBP(-)) at baseline according to self-reported ASAS IBP criteria, 2009.Methods:194 adult patients with PsA (CASPAR criteria, 2006) with inadequate response to csDMARD or one TNFi, were randomly assigned to receive NTK 120mg or placebo at weeks 0,1,2,4,6,8,10,14,18,22. The proportion of patients reported >1 problem in each domain was evaluated. Patients with missing values were considered as non-responders in the analysis.Results:97 PsA patients (N=54 IBP(+), N=43 IBP(-)) received NTK. The subpopulations didn’t differ significantly in gender, age, and PsA activity at baseline. Comparable percentage of patients reported any problems for each domain at baseline (p≥0.05) (data not shown). IBP(-) subpopulation had a greater improvement for all domains except of anxiety/depression. The absolute declines for IBP(+) vs IBP(-) patients were as followed: 24.1% vs 41.9% (mobility), 18.5 vs 41.9% (self-care), 24.0% vs 51.1% (usual activities), 24.1% vs 37.2% (pain/discomfort), 33.3% vs 9.3% (anxiety/depression). However, the only significant difference between IBP(+) and IBP(-) was observed in usual activity (Figure 1).Conclusion:NTK resulted in the growing improvement of each EQ-5D-5L domain through 24 weeks irrespectively of the presence of IBP. IBP(-) subjects showed trend to greater benefit compared to IBP(+).Figure 1Percentage of patients reported any problems in (A) pain/discomfort, (B) in usual activity at each visitAcknowledgements:This study was sponsored by JSC BIOCAD.Disclosure of Interests:Inna Gaydukova Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Tatiana Korotaeva Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, V Mazurov: None declared., Aleksey Samtsov: None declared., Vladislav Khayrutdinov: None declared., Andrey Bakulev: None declared., Alena Kundzer: None declared., Nikolaj Soroka: None declared., Anna Eremeeva Employee of: Biocad.


2020 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2020-218870
Author(s):  
Philip J Mease ◽  
Apinya Lertratanakul ◽  
Jaclyn K Anderson ◽  
Kim Papp ◽  
Filip Van den Bosch ◽  
...  

BackgroundUpadacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor under evaluation for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We evaluated upadacitinib in patients with PsA and prior inadequate response or intolerance to at least one biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).MethodsIn this 24-week randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, 642 patients were randomised (2:2:1:1) to once per day upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg, placebo followed by upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo followed by upadacitinib 30 mg at week 24. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 12. Achievement of minimal disease activity (MDA) was assessed at week 24. Treatment-emergent adverse events are reported for all patients who received at least one dose of trial drug.ResultsAt week 12, significantly more patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg versus placebo achieved ACR20 (56.9% and 63.8% vs 24.1%; p<0.001 for both comparisons). At week 24, MDA was achieved by more upadacitinib 15 mg-treated (25.1%) and 30 mg-treated patients (28.9%) versus placebo (2.8%; p<0.001 for both comparisons). Generally, the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar with placebo and upadacitinib 15 mg and higher with upadacitinib 30 mg at week 24. Rates of serious infections were 0.5%, 0.5% and 2.8% with placebo, upadacitinib 15 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg, respectively.ConclusionIn this trial of patients with active PsA who had inadequate response or intolerance to at least one biologic DMARD, upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg was more effective than placebo over 24 weeks in improving signs and symptoms of PsA.Clinical trial registration numberNCT03104374


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideto Kameda ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
Kunihiro Yamaoka ◽  
Motohiro Oribe ◽  
Mitsuhiro Kawano ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib over 84 weeks in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Methods All patients completing a 12-week, randomized, double-blind treatment period entered a blinded extension and continued upadacitinib 7.5, 15, or 30 mg once daily (QD), or were switched from placebo to upadacitinib 7.5, 15, or 30 mg QD. Efficacy and safety were assessed over 84 weeks. Results Of 197 randomized patients, 187 (94.9%) completed the 12-week period and entered the blinded extension; 152 (77.2%) patients were ongoing at week 84. At week 84, the proportions of patients achieving a 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) were 85.7%, 77.6%, and 58.0% with continued upadacitinib 7.5, 15, and 30 mg, respectively (nonresponder imputation), and were similar in patients who had switched from placebo. Favorable response rates were also observed for more stringent measures of response (ACR50/70) and remission (defined by the Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein, Clinical Disease Activity Index, or Simplified Disease Activity Index). The 15 mg and 30 mg doses of upadacitinib were associated with more rapid and numerically higher initial responses for some measures of disease activity and remission compared with the 7.5 mg dose. Rates of adverse events, infection, opportunistic infection, serious infection, and herpes zoster were lower with upadacitinib 7.5 and 15 mg versus 30 mg. Conclusions Upadacitinib demonstrated sustained efficacy and was well tolerated over 84 weeks in Japanese patients with RA, with upadacitinib 15 mg offering the most favorable benefit–risk profile. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02720523. Registered on March 22, 2016.


2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atul Deodhar ◽  
John D. Reveille ◽  
Diane D. Harrison ◽  
Lilianne Kim ◽  
Kim Hung Lo ◽  
...  

Objective.To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous golimumab (GOL) in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).Methods.In a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial, 208 patients were randomized (1:1) to intravenous (IV) infusions of GOL 2 mg/kg (n = 105) at weeks 0, 4, 12, and every 8 weeks, or PBO (n = 103) at weeks 0, 4, and 12, with crossover to GOL at Week 16. The primary endpoint was ≥ 20% improvement from baseline in the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Criteria (ASAS20) at Week 16. Secondary endpoints included ASAS40, ≥ 50% improvement in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI50), and change in the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) at Week 16. Safety was monitored through Week 28.Results.Significantly greater proportions of GOL-treated patients had ASAS20 response at Week 2 (37.1% vs 19.4%; p = 0.005) and at Week 16 (73.3% vs 26.2%; p < 0.001). At Week 16, 41.0% of those receiving GOL achieved BASDAI50 compared with 14.6% of those taking PBO (p < 0.001), and the GOL group had greater mean improvement in BASFI (−2.4 vs −0.5; p < 0.001). Through Week 16, 23.3% of patients in the PBO group and 32.4% of patients in the GOL group had ≥ 1 adverse event (AE); infections being the commonest type of AE. Through Week 28, two GOL-treated patients had a serious AE.Conclusion.GOL 2 mg/kg administered IV at weeks 0, 4, and every 8 weeks significantly reduced the signs and symptoms of AS in adults. AE were consistent with other antitumor necrosis factor therapies, with no new safety signals (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02186873).


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1298.2-1299
Author(s):  
T. Korotaeva ◽  
I. Gaydukova ◽  
V. Mazurov ◽  
A. Samtsov ◽  
V. Khayrutdinov ◽  
...  

Background:Inflammatory back pain (IBP) is a common symptom of axial disease in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The reported prevalence of axial disease in patients with PsA is quite variable and must be taken into account while choosing treatment strategy. Netakimab (NTK) is an anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody approved for psoriasis, ankylosing spondylitis, PsA in Russia and Belarus.Objectives:A subanalysis was aimed to investigate the ACR (American College of Rheumatology) 20/50/70 response rate in PsA patients with/without the axial disease, defined by the presence of IBP according to self-reported ASAS IBP criteria, 2009 at baseline.Methods:PATERA is an ongoing phase 3 international double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study (NCT03598751). 194 adult patients with PsA (CASPAR criteria, 2006) with inadequate response to csDMARD or one TNFi, were randomly assigned to receive NTK 120mg or placebo at weeks 0,1,2,4,6,8,10,14,18,22. The ACR response was calculated in NTK-treated patients with IBP (IBP(+)) and NTK-treated patients without IBP (IBP(-)) according to self-reported ASAS IBP criteria, 2009. Patients with missing values for categorical variables were considered as non-responders in the analysis.Results:97 PsA patients (N=54 IBP(+), N=43 IBP(-)) received NTK. Both subpopulations were comparable in gender, age, and PsA activity at baseline. There were no significant differences in ACR20 achievement between the groups (Figure 1). The percentage of patients with ACR50 was significantly (p<0.05) higher in the IBP(-) subpopulation at weeks 4-20 (data not shown), but not at week 24 with 63% IBP(+) and 79% IBP(-) responders (p≥0.05). Similarly, IBP(+) patients had a lower frequency of ACR70 response (Figure 1).Conclusion:NTK is effective in PsA treatment irrespectively of the presence of axial disease. Both IBP(-) and IBP(+) subpopulations achieved ACR20/50/70 as well, however, the benefit in IBP(-) patients was more pronounced.Figure 1ACR response ratesAcknowledgements:This study was sponsored by JSC BIOCAD.Disclosure of Interests:Tatiana Korotaeva Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Inna Gaydukova Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biocad, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, V Mazurov: None declared., Aleksey Samtsov: None declared., Vladislav Khayrutdinov: None declared., Andrey Bakulev: None declared., Alena Kundzer: None declared., Nikolaj Soroka: None declared., Anna Eremeeva Employee of: Biocad.


2018 ◽  
Vol 77 (9) ◽  
pp. 1295-1302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique Baeten ◽  
Mikkel Østergaard ◽  
James Cheng-Chung Wei ◽  
Joachim Sieper ◽  
Pentti Järvinen ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody targeting the p19 subunit of interleukin-23 (IL-23), in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).MethodsA total of 159 patients with biological-naïve AS, with active disease (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index score of ≥4), were randomised (1:1:1:1) to risankizumab (18 mg single dose, 90 mg or 180 mg at day 1 and weeks 8, 16 and 24) or placebo over a 24-week blinded period. The primary outcome was a 40% improvement in Assessment in Spondylo Arthritis International Society (ASAS40) at week 12. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug.ResultsAt week 12, ASAS40 response rates were 25.5%, 20.5% and 15.0% in the 18 mg, 90 mg and 180 mg risankizumab groups, respectively, compared with 17.5% in the placebo group. The estimated difference in proportion between the 180 mg risankizumab and placebo groups (primary endpoint) was –2.5% (95% CI –21.8 to 17.0; p=0.42). Rates of adverse events were similar in all treatment groups.ConclusionsTreatment with risankizumab did not meet the study primary endpoint and showed no evidence of clinically meaningful improvements compared with placebo in patients with active AS, suggesting that IL-23 may not be a relevant driver of disease pathogenesis and symptoms in AS.Trial registration numberNCT02047110; Pre-results.


RMD Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. e000731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carter Thorne ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
George Athanasios Karpouzas ◽  
Shihong Sheng ◽  
Regina Kurrasch ◽  
...  

ObjectivesThe phase III, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group SIRROUND-D study evaluated long-term efficacy and safety of the interleukin (IL)-6 inhibitor, sirukumab, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).MethodsPatients were randomised 1:1:1 to sirukumab 100  mg every 2 weeks (q2w), 50  mg every 4 weeks or placebo q2w subcutaneously. Patients initially randomised to placebo were rerandomised at Weeks 18, 40 or 52 to one of the sirukumab groups until Week 104.ResultsOf 1670 randomised patients, 1402 were included in the full analysis set and 1269 in the radiographic analysis set at Week 104. American College of Rheumatology scores, Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein, Clinical Disease Activity Index and clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcomes were sustained at Week 104 among patients initially randomised to sirukumab. Placebo patients subsequently rerandomised to sirukumab showed clinical improvements at Week 104 that were comparable to results among patients initially randomised to sirukumab. Radiographic progression from Week 52 to Week 104 was comparable between all groups whether initially randomised to sirukumab or subsequently rerandomised to sirukumab from placebo. No new safety signals were identified in the extended exposure period compared with the initial 52 weeks of treatment.ConclusionsSirukumab treatment resulted in sustained reductions in clinical signs and symptoms and minimal progression in radiographic damage over 2 years among patients with RA refractory to DMARDs. The safety profile of sirukumab was as expected for an anti-IL-6 agent, with no new signals reported.


2021 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2021-219876
Author(s):  
Evgeniy Nasonov ◽  
Saeed Fatenejad ◽  
Eugen Feist ◽  
Mariana Ivanova ◽  
Elena Korneva ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of olokizumab (OKZ) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite treatment with methotrexate (MTX).MethodsIn this 24-week multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneously administered OKZ 64 mg once every 2 weeks, OKZ 64 mg once every 4 weeks, or placebo plus MTX. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 12. The secondary efficacy endpoints included percentage of subjects achieving Disease Activity Score 28-joint count based on C reactive protein <3.2, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index at week 12, ACR50 response and Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤2.8 at week 24. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed throughout the study.ResultsA total of 428 patients were randomised. ACR20 responses were more frequent with OKZ every 2 weeks (63.6%) and OKZ every 4 weeks (70.4%) than placebo (25.9%) (p<0.0001 for both comparisons). There were significant differences in all secondary efficacy endpoints between OKZ-treated arms and placebo. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) were reported by more patients in the OKZ groups compared with placebo. Infections were the most common TESAEs. No subjects developed neutralising antidrug antibodies.ConclusionsTreatment with OKZ was associated with significant improvement in signs, symptoms and physical function of rheumatoid arthritis without discernible differences between the two regimens. Safety was as expected for this class of agents. Low immunogenicity was observed.Trial registration numberNCT02760368.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Chiara Ditto ◽  
Simone Parisi ◽  
Marta Priora ◽  
Silvia Sanna ◽  
Clara Lisa Peroni ◽  
...  

Abstract AntiTNF-α biosimilars are broadly available for the treatment of inflammatory arthritis. There are a lot of data concerning the maintenance of clinical efficacy after switching from originators to biosimilars; therefore, such a transition is increasingly encouraged both in the US and Europe. However, there are reports about flares and adverse events (AE) as a non-medical switch remains controversial due to ethical and clinical implications (efficacy, safety, tolerability). The aim of our work was to evaluate the disease activity trend after switching from etanercept originator (oETA-Enbrel) to its biosimilar (bETA-SP4/Benepali) in a cohort of patients in Turin, Piedmont, Italy. In this area, the switch to biosimilars is stalwartly encouraged. We switched 87 patients who were in a clinical state of stability from oETA to bETA: 48 patients were affected by Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA),26 by Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) and 13 by Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS).We evaluated VAS-pain, Global-Health, CRP, number of swollen and tender joints, Disease Activity Score on 28 joints (DAS28) for RA, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) for PsA, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Health Assessment Questionnaire for the spondyloarthropathies (HAQ-S),Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) for AS patients. 11/85 patients (12.6%) stopped treatment after switching to biosimilar etanercept. No difference was found between oETA and bETA in terms of efficacy. However, some arthritis flare and AE were reported. Our data regarding maintenance of efficacy and percentage of discontinuation were in line with the existing literature.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document